TV Journalism in India: Money and Sensationalism dominates News, Ethics and

Principles

"In spite of TV Channels and News Papers mushrooming in India, quality and credential of
news are deteriorating in the country. News producers and broadcasters are more into
making money than disseminating News. Industrialists and businessmen with little knowledge
of Media Ethics are now venturing into media business and dictating the journalists to act on
their command."

Basudev Mahapatra*: March 20, 2008

Media reports regarding uproar in Orissa Assembly over Vedanta University project on
March 20 revealed how journalism practiced in India is fast shifting itself from the principle
and ethical roots.

Reports in different TV Channels and Newspapers were less informative than bias to
influence the discussion scheduled for a date 4 days later. The statements of political leaders
and Higher Education Minister were carried without any crosscheck of facts they said
although we all know about the common proverb that ‘politicians promise a bridge when
there is no river’ for a mere political benefit.

A television channel in Orissa owned by the family of a ruling party MP telecasted reports
that seemed politically bias and clearly motivated to safeguard the interests of a corporate
foundation whose credibility was questioned by the apex court of India. Even most of the
newspapers claiming themselves to be highly circulated across the state had a similar line of
reporting.

If one analyzes the report transmitted in the aforesaid local TV Channel, the ethical points of
journalism seemed to have shifted their focus. In the report, the basic purpose of journalism
was neglected by providing information to empower people but to satisfy the interests of
some political parties and the Anil Agarwal Foundation that is into Vedanta University
Project against people’s will and livelihood interests.

The facts were even transmitted without any crosschecking. On screen, Higher Education
Minister of Orissa said, ‘fulfilling its role as the facilitator, government has already acquired
6252.90 acres of land in the project area in the name of Anil Agarwal foundation’. Did the
Minister utter a true figure? As a watchdog, journalist must crosscheck it. But, ironically, no
supporting byte of either a revenue department official or any revenue document was shown
to confirm the accuracy of the figure.

The other statement Higher Education Minister gave was, ‘we have told Anil Agarwal
Foundation to give priority to the students of Orissa for studying in the proposed world class
Vedanta University’.

But as per clause 6, Para iv, the MOU signed with Vedanta Foundation – the former name of
Anil Agarwal foundation, ‘In order to allow it (Vedanta University), to function as a world
class University, GOO (Government of Orissa) shall ensure complete autonomy to Vedanta
and the university authorities with regard to administration, admission, fee structure,
curriculum and faculty selection. The objective is to attract best talents globally for students
and faculty.’
Again, as a further clarification, the MOU mentions in Para X of the same clause that, ‘The
university shall have the immunity from any reservation laws of the state government and a
statement to this effect shall be incorporated in the legislation’.

The statement of the minister goes against the promises made by the government in the
MOU. So, has the MOU been revised to incorporate what he said or it is just a verbal request
he made to the Foundation? The TV News report maintained darkness about this serious
confusion. This indicates a low level obligation of the journalist to the ‘truth’.

Again, using the animated visuals, perhaps produced and distributed by the foundation, the
TV Channel reported how Vedanta University would be a truly world class University in
Orissa without mentioning the source who claimed it. Meaning, it was the opinion of the
channel that matched the foundation claims. Nowhere, the viewpoints of people opposing to
the project were incorporated, at least, to maintain impartiality in reporting. By imposing this
opinion in the name of News, the journalist and the channel violated three major points of
Media Ethics – i. The journalist didn’t display its loyalty to the citizens who apprehend
adverse impact of the project on their life and livelihood; ii. The journalist didn’t maintain
independence while covering and producing the News; iii. The news imposed an opinion on
its viewers than providing a forum for public appraisal and criticism.

Such kind of reporting not only gives Indian Journalism a bad name but also limits the scope
of impact. The basic purpose gets diluted when the reporter or broadcaster hides or twists
certain vital information to justify its own viewpoint in the news.

This is not the only case that questions the Channels commitment to Media Ethics. On Mar
19, the same channel transmitted a fiction entitled 'Tamasoma Jyotirgamay' produced by
Posco – the South Korean steel giant that is facing strong public resistance in the proposed
project site near Paradeep. The film was made to create a mass opinion in support of the
project. But certain dialogues in the film were derogatory to National Integration and the
federal system and also promoting regional disparity. Using few artists the film tried to
convince people through some dialogues like, ‘before the project was planned where were the
outsider (other state) activists and leaders who encourage people in the project site to oppose
the project?’ ‘Outsider activists and politicians are no way concerned with the problems of
People but are envious of the development projects planned in the state of Orissa’. ‘Agitating
against development projects has become a fashion these days’. However, the professionals
involved in the film were only hired on payment to make these dialogues said in the film but
were no way affected by the project directly.

The film was hardly analytical about the livelihood issues of people, possible scarcity of food
materials once the project stands on the land that are used for agriculture now, and the
possibility of transformation of the sustainable local market economy into one that would be
controlled by outside businessmen. But instead, the film started blaming activists who are
fighting for the basic livelihood rights of people in the country as envious outsiders. There
would be no problem if the film were for internal purpose of the corporate house. But when it
came for transmission, how the channel could approve such remarks for public broadcasting,
as these were not presented as individual viewpoints but conclusive messages of the film?

The above examples are just tip of the iceberg. Satellite Television Channels focusing on
Orissa have become PR windows more than infotainment channels for people. Corporate
houses like TATA, NALCO are now into production of propagandist TV series to be aired on
various TV Channels. And the stand of TV Channels are very simple – ‘we need revenue to
survive’. It’s not only the case of private broadcasters but public broadcaster like
Doordarshan is also in the fray for generating revenue through such PR campaigns. However,
Doordarshan has a previewing body that censors the programme before telecast.

Because of such PR oriented news motivated by some vested interests of a journalist or the
broadcaster, News is losing its importance among people of India. In spite of TV Channels
and News Papers mushrooming in India, quality and credential of news are deteriorating in
the country. News producers and broadcasters are more into making money than
disseminating News. Industrialists and businessmen with little knowledge of Media Ethics
are now venturing into media business and dictating the journalists to act on their command.
But the Indian industry takes it as an advantage for growth through more investment.

Even journalists of high respect seem to have fallen into the trap of investors. I was shocked
with certain statements made by Rajdeep Sardesai, who was once my role model, on some
occasions. The first was in Ramnath Goenka Memorial discussion on responsible journalism
where, on carrying sensational news stories, he said - ‘I have to carry such stories to make
people see my channel and the show gets good TRP because I am running a channel
(Meaning, doing business as a profitable proposition!). The second occasion was the last
establishment day of Doordarshan when the channel organised a panel of veteran journalists
facing questions from some other journalists in the gallery. Answering a question about the
social watchdog responsibility of a journalist Rajdeep said, ‘we are journalists not activists’.
What a demarcation! An activist may not be a journalist, but how a journalist cannot be an
activist when journalist is the first man to collect information and make them go public to
inform and aware people and all others who are working for the development of people? I
still respect Rajdeep for his contribution to TV journalism in India. Such statements would
have been the results of lots of business pressure on him.

Another incident of TV Journalism shook the nation was telecast of the sound byte of Kasmir
Singh claiming himself as worked as a spy of India in Pakistan. What a low level
commitment towards the nation displayed by a spy, if it is so, and a journalist who is
supposed to be more responsible than anybody else? It’s not a mistake by chance but a
deliberate attempt to stain the image of India in the international forums and sour the Indo-
Pak relationship. A deliberate attempt because the journalist who asked such a question
shouldn’t have asked because any irresponsible answer would tarnish the image of the nation.
And the telecast could have been stopped on any channel by a unanimous decision of the
broadcasters. Like the UK editors decided not to carry any picture of Diana shot by the
paparaji photographers when she died of an accident. Even the US media was pressured not
to carry the photographers. This indicates the loyalty of Press to the Citizens, their emotion
and the Nation at large.

Even in India, news catered by BBC is still considered authentic and news coming on BBC
channel has the best impact world over because of the strictly ethical journalism practiced by
its journalists. Most players of the UK Media do practices journalism on ethical lines.

But in India, the journalism practice is going tabloid way. The practitioners are more behind
sensationalism and hype creating stuff than the news that would inform and empower people.
As the trend of journalism practice goes in India, it’s high time that some kind of controlling
system be set to ensure an ethical and responsible journalism in the country.
*Basudev Mahapatra is a Bhubaneswar (Orissa, India) based journalist. He is the Editorial
Head of ‘HOTnHIT Newsfeatures’ – a TV News Agency in Eastern part of India and the
editor of purely issue based news website http://hotnhitnews.com.